Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 1 of 21
s
nn m
nyn
rrm r
fly Tn m r fin
iim rTT.mr
uriiiii m1A1I1
IUUKI
uiiiui
r.iic
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
rr mrr
ii
a
myyr
irir.
a 0
'3t.'
SHANNON PEREZ, HAROLD
DUTTON, JR. and GREGORY TAMEZ,
Plaintiffs
CIVIL ACTION NO.
V.
SA-1 1-CA-360-OLG-JES-XR
STATE OF TEXAS; RICK PERRY, in his
official capacity as Governor of the State of
Texas; DAVID DEWHURST, in his official
capacity as Lieutenant Governor of the State
of Texas; JOE STRAUS, in his official
capacity as Speaker of the Texas House of
Representatives; JOl-IN STEEN, in his
official capacity as Secretary of State of the
State of Texas,
[Lead case]
Defendants
MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE
CAUCUS, TEXAS HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES (MALC),
Plaint ffs
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO.
STATE OF TEXAS; RICK PERRY, in his
official capacity as Governor of the State of
Texas; DAVID DEWHURST, in his official
capacity as Lieutenant Governor of the State
of Texas; JOE STRAUS, in his official
capacity as Speaker of the Texas House of
Representatives,
Defendants
SA-1 1-CA-361-OLG-JES-XR
[Consolidated case]
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 2 of 21
TEXAS LATINO REDISTRICTING TASK
FORCE, JOEY CARDENAS, ALEX
JIMENEZ, EMELDA MENENDEZ,
TOMACITA OLIVARES, JOSE
OLIVARES, ALEJANDRO ORTIZ,
REBECCA ORTIZ, FLORINDA CHAVEZ,
ARMANDO CORTEZ, CESAR EDUARDO
YEVENES, GREGORIO BENITO
PALOMINO, RENATO DE LOS SANTOS,
GILBERTO TORRES, SOCORRO
RAMOS, SERGIO CORONADO and
CYNTHIA VALADEZ,
Plaintiffs
CIVIL ACTION NO.
V.
SA-1 1-CA-490-OLG-JES-XR
[Consolidated case]
RICK PERRY, in his official capacity as
Governor of the State of Texas; HOPE
ANDRADE, in her official capacity as
Secretary of State of the State of Texas,
Defendants
FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFFS TEXAS LATINO
REDISTRICTING TASK FORCE, ET AL.
TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:
I.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs are an association and individual registered voters that seek, on behalf of
themselves and their members, declaratory and injunctive relief to enforce the Fourteenth
and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of
1965.
2.
Plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment that the 2011 Texas congressional (Plan C 185) and
Texas House of Representatives (Plan H283) redistricting plans and the alterations made
2
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 3 of 21
to House District (HD) 90 in the 2013 Texas House of Representatives redistricting plan
(Plan H358) violate their civil rights by unlawfully diluting the voting strength of Latinos.
Plaintiffs further seek a declaratory judgment that the 2011 Texas congressional and Texas
House of Representatives redistricting plans and the alterations made to HD 90 in Plan
H358 discriminate against them on the basis of race and national origin. Plaintiffs seek a
permanent injunction prohibiting the calling, holding, supervising or certifying of any
future congressional or Texas House elections under the 2011 redistricting plans or the
2013 Texas House of Representatives redistricting plan. Plaintiffs seek the creation of
congressional and Texas House redistricting plans that will not cancel out, minimize or
dilute the voting strength of Latino voters in Texas.
Plaintiffs further seek an order
subjecting Texas to the preclearance requirement of section
under 42 U.S.C.
§
1
5
of the Voting Rights Act
973a(c) (section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act). Plaintiffs also seek
costs and attorneys' fees.
II.
JURISDICTION
3.
Jurisdiction is based upon 28 U.S.C. 1343a (3) & (4) and upon 28
u.s.c.
1331 for causes
of action arising from 42 U.S.C. 1973 and 1973c. Jurisdiction for Plaintiffs' claim for
declaratory relief is based upon 28 U.S.C. 2201 and 2202. Jurisdiction for Plaintiffs'
claims under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution is based
upon 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and 28 U.S.C. 1331. Jurisdiction for Plaintiffs' claim for
attorney's fees is based on 42 U.S.C. Sections 19731(e) and 1988. Venue is proper in this
court under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b).
3
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 4 of 21
III.
PLAINTIFFS
4.
Plaintiff TEXAS LATINO REDISTRICTING TASK FORCE is an unincorporated
association of individuals and organizations committed to securing fair redistricting plans
for Texas. Organizational members of the Texas Latino Redistricting Task Force include
Hispanics Organized for Political Education (HOPE), the Mexican American Bar
Association of Texas, the National Organization for Mexican American Rights,
Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, the William C. Velasquez Institute, and
Southwest Workers' Union. Individuals who are members of the Task Force member
organizations include: Latino registered voters of Texas who are injured by the dilution
of Latino voting strength statewide; Latino registered voters of Texas who reside in areas
where Latino voting strength has been diluted by redistricting plans H283, C185 and
H358; Latino registered voters of Texas who reside in districts that were subjected to
race-based redistricting in violation of their rights; and Latino registered voters of Texas
who reside in areas where Latino-majority districts should have been created but were not
in plans H283 and C 185.
5.
Plaintiff Joe Cardenas III is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in Louise,
Texas. In plans H283, C 185 and H3 58, Plaintiff Cardenas resides in Texas House
District 85 and Congressional District 27.
6.
Plaintiff Florinda Chavez is Latina and a registered voter of Texas. She resides in Austin,
Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Chavez resides in Texas House District
49 and Congressional District 35.
4
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 5 of 21
7.
Plaintiff Cynthia Valadez is Latina and a registered voter of Texas. She resides in Austin,
Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Valadez resides in Texas House District
51 and
8.
Congressional District 35.
Plaintiff Emelda Menendez is Latina and a registered voter of Texas. She resides in San
Antonio, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Menendez resides in Texas
House District 120 and Congressional District 28.
9.
Plaintiff Alejandro Ortiz is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in San
Antonio, Texas. In plans H283, C 185 and H3 58, Plaintiff Ortiz resides in Texas House
District 116 and Congressional District 20.
10.
Plaintiff Rebecca Ortiz is Latina and a registered voter of Texas. She resides in San
Antonio, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Ortiz resides in Texas House
District 116 and Congressional District 20.
11.
Plaintiff Armando Cortez is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in San
Antonio, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Cortez resides in Texas House
District 119 and Congressional District 35.
12.
Plaintiff Gregorio Benito Palomino is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides
in San Antonio, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Palomino resides in
Texas House District 118 and Congressional District 35
13.
Plaintiff Cesar Eduardo Yevenes is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in
Corpus Christi, Texas. In plans H283, C 185 and H358, Plaintiff Yevenes resides in Texas
House District 32 and Congressional District 27. Plaintiff Yevenes is injured by having
the congressional district in which he resides, Congressional District 27, altered so that it
is no longer a Latino opportunity district. Plaintiff Yevenes no longer resides in a
5
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 6 of 21
congressional district in which he has the opportunity to elect his candidate of choice.
Plaintiff Yevenes is further injured by having the House District in which he resides
reconfigured so that it is no longer a Latino opportunity district. Plaintiff Yevenes resided
in Texas House District 33 in the 2010 benchmark House plan. Plaintiff Yevenes no
longer resides in a Texas House district in which he has the opportunity to elect his
candidate of choice.
14.
Plaintiff Jose Olivares is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in Corpus
Christi, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Olivares resides in Texas I-louse
District 34 and Congressional District 27. Plaintiff Olivares is injured by having the
congressional district in which he resides, Congressional District 27, altered so that it is
no longer a Latino opportunity district. Plaintiff Olivares no longer resides in a
congressional district in which he has the opportunity to elect his candidate of choice.
15.
Plaintiff Tomacita Olivares is Latina and a registered voter of Texas. She resides in
Corpus Christi, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Olivares resides in Texas
House District 34 and Congressional District 27. Plaintiff Olivares is injured by having
the congressional district in which she resides, Congressional District 27, altered so that it
is no longer a Latino opportunity district. Plaintiff Olivares no longer resides in a
congressional district in which she has the opportunity to elect her candidate of choice.
16.
Plaintiff Renato De Los Santos is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in
Dallas, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff De Los Santos resides in Texas
House District
Ill
and Congressional District 6. Plaintiff De Los Santos is injured by
the failure to create a Latino-majority congressional district in the Dallas-Fort Worth area
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 7 of 21
that would provide him the opportunity to elect his candidate of choice to Congress.
Plaintiff De Los Santos is further injured by race-based redistricting in Plan C185.
17.
Plaintiff Alex Jimenez is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in Fort
Worth, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Jimenez resides in Texas House
District 95 and Congressional District 12. Plaintiff Jimenez is injured by the failure to
create a Latino-majority congressional district in the Dallas-Fort Worth area that would
provide him the opportunity to elect his candidate of choice to Congress. Plaintiff
Jimenez is further injured by race-based redistricting in Plan Cl 85.
18.
Plaintiff Gilberto Tones is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in Uvalde
County, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Torres resides in Texas House
District 80 and Congressional District 23 and is injured by having the congressional
district in which he resides, Congressional District 23, altered so that it is no longer a
Latino opportunity district. Plaintiff Tones no longer resides in a congressional district in
which he has the opportunity to elect his candidate of choice. Plaintiff Tones is further
injured by race-based redistricting in Plan C 185.
19.
Plaintiff Socorro Ramos is Latina and a registered voter of Texas. She resides in Socorro,
Texas. In plans H283, Cl 85 and H358, Plaintiff Ramos resides in Texas House District
75 and Congressional District 23. Plaintiff Ramos resided in Congressional District 16 in
the 2010 benchmark congressional plan. Plaintiff Ramos is injured by having the
congressional district in which she resides reconfigured so that she is now located in
District 23, which is not a Latino opportunity district. Plaintiff Ramos no longer resides
in a congressional district in which she has the opportunity to elect her candidate
of
choice. Plaintiff Ramos is further injured by race-based redistricting in Plan Cl 85.
7
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 8 of 21
20.
Plaintiff Sergio Coronado is Latino and a registered voter of Texas. He resides in
Canutillo, Texas. In plans H283, C185 and H358, Plaintiff Coronado resides in Texas
House District 78 and Congressional District 16. Plaintiff Coronado is injured by having
the House District in which he resides configured so that it does not offer Latino voters
the opportunity to elect their candidate of choice. Plaintiff Coronado does not reside in a
Texas House district in which he has the opportunity to elect his candidate of choice.
Plaintiff Coronado is further injured by race-based redistricting in Plan H283.
21.
All plaintiffs are injured by the dilution of Latino voting strength statewide in plans
H283, C185 and H358.
22.
All plaintiffs are injured by race-based redistricting in plans H283, C185 and H358.
Iv.
DEFENDANTS
23.
Defendant RICK PERRY is sued in his official capacity as Governor of Texas.
Defendant PERRY is the Chief Executive Officer of the State of Texas.
24.
Defendant JOHN STEEN is sued in his official capacity as Secretary of State of Texas.
Defendant STEEN is the State's election officer and as such is responsible for overseeing
the conduct of elections within the State.
V.
FACTS
25.
According to the U.S. Census, in 2010 the population of Texas was 25,145,561 with a
Latino population of 9,460,921 (38%). The Latino voting age population of Texas was
34% of the total voting age population. The Latino citizen voting age population of Texas
was 25% of the total citizen voting age population. In 2012, the U.S. Census estimated
that the population of Texas was 26,059,203 with a total Latino population of 3 8.2%.
8
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 9 of 21
Following the 2012 General Election, the Texas Legislative Council reported 13,122,046
registered voters in Texas; 10.3% of the voters are Spanish-surnamed.
26.
According to the 2010 Census, approximately 65% of total population growth in Texas
between 2000 and 2010 was comprised of Latinos.
27.
The redistricting plan in place prior to the 2011 redistricting cycle (the "2010 state house
benchmark") for the Texas House of Representatives was ordered into effect on
November 28, 2001 by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in
Balderas v. Texas (No. 6:O1CV1 58).
28.
The 2011 redistricting plan for the Texas House of Representatives (Plan H283) was
signed into law by Defendant PERRY on June 17, 2011.
29.
The 2013 redistricting plan for the Texas House of Representatives (Plan H358) was
signed into law by Defendant PERRY on June 26, 2013 and takes effect September 24,
2013.
30.
The redistricting plan in place for Texas congressional districts prior to the 2011
redistricting cycle (the "2010 congressional benchmark") was ordered into effect on
August 4, 2006 by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in LULAC v.
Perry (No. 2:03-00354).
31.
The 2011 redistricting plan for Texas congressional districts (Plan C 185) was signed into
law by Defendant PERRY on July 19, 2011.
The 2013 redistricting plan for Texas
congressional districts (Plan C235) was signed into law by Defendant Perry on June 26,
2013 and takes effect September 24, 2013.
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 10 of 21
32.
The historical background of Texas House and congressional redistricting includes
federal court orders revising Texas's redistricting plans, enacted in 2001 and 2003
respectively, to cure violations of the federal Voting Rights Act.
33.
The Legislature's adoption of plans C185 and H283 included departures from the normal
procedural sequence and substantive departures from the factors usually considered
important by the Legislature in redistricting.
34.
During the
82nd
Legislature's Regular and Special Sessions, Latino and African American
legislators serving on the House and Senate Redistricting Committees were excluded by
legislative leadership from the process of drawing and negotiating plans C185 and H283.
35.
During the 82
Legislature's Regular and Special Sessions, Latino and African American
residents of Texas were denied the opportunity to analyze and comment on plans Cl 85
and H283. The House and Senate Redistricting Committees did not hold public hearings
following the public release of plans C185 and H283 and prior to voting on plans C185
and H283.
36.
Despite the dramatic growth of the Latino population in Texas since 2000, Plan H283
contains one fewer Latino opportunity district when compared to the 2010 benchmark
Texas House plan. Under Plan H283, Latinos have lost voting strength in Texas.
37.
Plan H283 dilutes Latino voting strength statewide by "packing" Latino voters in El Paso,
Cameron, Hidalgo and Nueces counties.
Plan H283 fails to create at least three
additional Latino-majority House districts that afford Latinos the opportunity to elect
their preferred candidate. Plan C185 also uses race as a predominant factor to allocate
Latino voters into and out of HD 1 17 and across districts in El Paso County.
10
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 11 of 21
38.
On February 28, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas ordered
into effect interim redistricting plans H309 and C235 to address challenges to the 2011
enacted plans that presented a "likelihood of success on the merits" of statutory or
constitutional claims or presented "not insubstantial" claims under section
Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973c.
See
5
of the Voting
Dkt. 690 and 691. Interim plans H309 and C235 were
used by Texas for the 2012 election cycle.
In the 2013 Regular Session, the Texas
Legislature adopted redistricting plans H358 and C235. Enacted Plan C235 contained the
same boundaries as interim plan C235. In Plan H358, the Texas Legislature made several
changes to interim plan H309 including changes to the boundaries of HD 90.
39.
The Legislature's adoption of plan H358 included departures from the normal procedural
sequence and substantive departures from the factors usually considered important by the
Legislature in redistricting.
40.
During the 83rd Legislature's first Special Session, Plan H358 was adopted as an
amendment to SB3 on June 20, 2013, on the floor of the Texas House without
consideration of the amendment in committee and without the opportunity for public
testimony.
41.
The configuration of HD 90 in Plan H358 dilutes Latino voting strength and uses race as
a predominant factor to allocate Latino voters into and out of HD 90. In H358, the Texas
Legislature changed HD 90 to reduce the number of Latino registered voters and the
strength of the Latino vote in HD 90. The changes to HD 90 also reduce the African
American citizen voting age population of HD9O. The changes to HD 90 in H358 reduce
the ability of Latino voters to nominate their preferred candidate in subsequent elections.
11
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 12 of 21
42.
The significant growth of the Latino population in Texas since 2000 allowed Texas to
gain some, if not all of its four new congressional districts. Despite the growth of the
Latino population, and the critical role it played in securing the four new congressional
districts, Plan C 185 contains the same number of Latino opportunity districts when
compared to the 2010 benchmark congressional plan.
Plan C185 uses race as a
predominant factor to allocate Latino voters into and out of CD 23 and across districts in
the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex.
Plan also C185 dilutes Latino voting strength
statewide by "packing" and "fracturing" Latino voters in South Texas, Houston and the
Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex.
43.
For example, Plan C185 removes Nueces County, and its more than 200,000 voting-age
Latinos, from the South Texas configuration of congressional districts and strands them
in a district stretching northward in order to prevent Nueces County Latinos from electing
their candidate of choice.
In addition to stripping Latinos out of the South Texas
configuration of congressional districts, Plan C 185 altered Congressional District 23 to
prevent Latinos from having the opportunity to elect their candidate of choice. Plan
Cl 85 fails to create nine Latino-majority congressional districts that afford Latinos the
opportunity to elect their preferred candidate.
44.
In the 2010 benchmark congressional plan, Latinos had the opportunity to elect their
preferred candidate in 22% (7 of 32) of the state's congressional districts. In Plan C185,
Latinos have the opportunity to elect their preferred candidate in 19% (7 of 36) of the
state's congressional districts. Thus, despite their growth, in Plan Cl 85 Latinos lost
voting strength in Texas.
12
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 13 of 21
45.
On September 25, 1975, section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was extended and
amended to cover the State of Texas. State and political subdivisions covered by the Act
must comply with certain specific procedures. Among them is the requirement that all
qualifications, prerequisites, standards, practices, or procedures with respect to voting
different from those in effect on November 1, 1972 must be determined, either by the
United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the United States Attorney
General, not to have the purpose or effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on
account of race, color or membership in a language minority group.
46.
The State of Texas was a covered jurisdiction subject to the requirements of section
the Voting Rights Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
§
5
of
1973c. On July 27, 2006, President
George W. Bush signed into law the Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and
Amendments Act of 2006, which extended section
Shelby Cnty., Ala.
v.
Holder,
5
for 25 years. On June 25 2013, in
133 S. Ct. 2612 (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated
the reauthorized section 5 geographic coverage formula, codified at 42 U.S.C. 1973b(b).
47.
Section 3 (c) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973a(c) authorizes a federal
court, following a finding "that violations of the fourteenth or fifteenth amendment
justifying equitable relief have occurred within the territory of such State or political
subdivision," may order that the jurisdiction preclear its election changes pursuant to
section 5. Section 3 (c) is a permanent provision of the federal Voting Rights Act.
48.
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973, applies nationwide and
prohibits voting practices and procedures that result in the denial or abridgement of the
right of any citizen to vote on account of race, color or membership in a language
minority group. Section 2 is a permanent provision of the federal Voting Rights Act.
13
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 14 of 21
The 2010 Benchmark Texas Congressional Redistricting Plan
49.
There were 32 districts in the 2010 benchmark congressional redistricting plan for Texas.
Seven of the congressional districts in the 2010 congressional benchmark plan are Latino-
majority and offer Latinos the opportunity to elect their candidate of choice.
50.
Following the 2010 Census, Texas was apportioned 36 congressional districts.
The 2011 Congressional Redistricting Plan (C 185)
51.
Plan C185 contains 36 congressional districts and contains an overall population
deviation of one.
52.
Plan C 185 contains 7 districts in which Latinos have the opportunity to elect their
preferred candidate to Congress.
53.
Plan C185 does not include a Latino-majority congressional district in the Dallas-Fort
Worth area. Plan C 185 also uses race as a predominant factor to allocate Latino voters
across districts in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex.
54.
The Latino population of Dallas and Tarrant counties is sufficiently geographically
compact to comprise the majority of the voting age persons in a congressional district.
The Latino population of Dallas and Tarrant counties is also sufficiently geographically
compact to comprise the majority of the citizen voting age persons in a congressional
district.
55.
A congressional district can be created in the Dallas-Fort Worth area that will afford
Latino voters the opportunity to elect their candidate of choice.
56.
Plan C185 includes only six congressional districts located in the southern and western
portion of the state that offer Latinos the opportunity to elect their candidate of choice.
14
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 15 of 21
Plan C 185 also uses race as a predominant factor to allocate Latino voters into and out of
CD 23.
57.
The Latino population of Texas is sufficiently geographically compact to comprise the
majority of citizen voting age persons in at least seven congressional districts located in
the southern and western portion of the state.
58.
Seven congressional districts can be created in the southern and western portion of the
state that offer Latino voters the opportunity to elect their candidate of choice.
59.
Plan C185 includes one Latino-majority congressional district in Harris County.
60.
The Latino population of Harris County is sufficiently geographically compact to
comprise the majority of citizen voting age persons in one congressional district and the
majority of voting age persons in a second congressional district. The Latino and African
American population of Harris County is sufficiently geographically compact to comprise
the majority of citizen voting age persons in one additional congressional district when
compared to the benchmark congressional redistricting plan.
61.
Two congressional districts can be created in Harris County that will afford Latino voters
the opportunity to elect their candidate of choice.
62.
Latinos in Texas, including the areas in which Latino-majority congressional districts can
be created, are politically cohesive.
63.
Anglos (White Non-Hispanics) vote sufficiently as a bloc to enable them
in the absence
of special circumstances, such as the Latino candidate running unopposed
usually to
defeat the Latino voters' preferred candidates in Texas, including the areas in which
Latino-majority congressional districts can be created.
15
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 16 of 21
64.
Plan C185 interacts with social and historical conditions to cause an inequality in the
opportunity of Latino voters to elect representatives of their choice as compared to Anglo
voters.
The 2011 Texas House of Representatives Plan (H283)
65.
Plan H283 contains a total of 150 House districts. In Plan H283, 34 House districts
contain a majority Latino voting age population and 30 House districts contain a majority
Latino citizen voting age population.
66.
Plan H283 contains fewer districts in which Latinos have the opportunity to elect their
candidate of choice when compared to the 2010 benchmark Texas House redistricting
plan. Plan H283 offers less opportunity for Latinos to elect their preferred candidates to
the Texas House of Representatives when compared to the 2010 benchmark plan.
67.
Plan C185 also uses race as a predominant factor to allocate Latino voters into and out of
HD 117 and across districts in El Paso County.
68.
The Latino population of Texas is sufficiently geographically compact to comprise the
majority of citizen voting age persons in at least 33 Texas House districts.
69.
At least 33 Texas House districts can be created in the state that offer Latino voters the
opportunity to elect their candidate of choice.
70.
Latinos in Texas, including the areas in which Latino-majority Texas House districts can
be created, are politically cohesive.
71.
Anglos vote sufficiently as a bloc to enable them
in the absence of special
circumstances, such as the Latino candidate running unopposed
usually to defeat the
Latino voters' preferred candidates in Texas, including the areas in which Latino majority
Texas House districts can be created.
16
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 17 of 21
72.
Plan H283 interacts with social and historical conditions to cause an inequality in the
opportunity of Latino voters to elect representatives of their choice as compared to Anglo
voters.
The 2013 Texas House of Representatives Plan (H358)
73.
HD 90 is the only Latino opportunity House district in Tarrant County. In 2011, the
Texas Legislature made changes to HD 90, at the urging of the Texas Latino
Redistricting Task Force, to raise the Latino voting strength of HD 90. The Legislature's
decision to increase the Latino voting strength of HD 90 was maintained by this Court in
its interim redistricting plan for the 2012 elections.
74.
In the 2012 Democratic Primary election, the Anglo incumbent of HD 90 was challenged
by a Latino candidate.
The Anglo incumbent prevailed in the Democratic Primary
election by 159 votes and went on to win the General Election in November 2012.
75.
Plan H358 changes the court-drawn interim plan by swapping precincts between HD 90
andHD99.
76.
Plan H358 moves 4,397 individuals out of interim HD 90 and places them into HD 99.
The population removed from HD 90 is 44% Latino with a Spanish Surnamed Voter
Registration (SSVR) of 20.6%.
77.
Plan H358 then moves 4,621 individuals into HD 90 from HD 99. The population added
to HD 90 is 33.8% Latino with an SSVR of only 8.5%.
78.
The changes to HD 90 result in a decrease in the SSVR of HD 90 from
5
1.1% to 50.1 %.
The changes also reduce the African American citizen voting age percentage of HD 90
from 18% to 16%. Plan H3 58 also uses race as a predominant factor to allocate Latino
voters into and out of HD 90.
17
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 18 of 21
79.
Plans C185 and H283 and the alterations made to HD 90 in H358 operate to dilute the
voting strength of Latinos in the State of Texas.
80.
At all times relevant herein, Defendants have acted under color of State law.
VI.
CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT
1
Equal Protection Clause of the J4th Amendment to the US. Constitution
81.
Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
82.
Plans C185, H283, and the alterations made to HD 90 in Plan H358 discriminate against
th
Plaintiffs on the basis of race and national origin in violation of the 14 Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution.
COUNT 2
15th
Amendment to the US. Constitution
83.
Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
84.
Plans Cl 85, H283, and the alterations made to HD 90 in Plan H358 discriminate against
th
Plaintiffs on the basis of race and national origin in violation of the 15 Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution.
COUNT 3
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act
85.
Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
86.
Plans C185, H283, and the alterations made to HD 90 in Plan H358 result in a denial or
abridgement of the right to vote of individual plaintiffs and organizational plaintifrs
members on account of their race, color, or ethnicity, by having the effect of canceling
out or minimizing their individual voting strength as minorities in Texas. Plans C185,
18
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 19 of 21
H283, and the alterations made to HD 90 in Plan H358 do not afford individual plaintiffs
and organizational plaintiffs' members an equal opportunity to participate in the political
process and to elect representatives of their choice, and denies individual plaintiffs and
organizational plaintiff's members the right to vote in elections without distinction of
race, color or previous condition of servitude in violation of 42 U.S.C. Section 1973.
VII.
REQUEST FOR THREE JUDGE COURT
87.
Plaintiffs request a three-judge trial court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2284.
VIII.
ATTORNEYS' FEES
88.
In accordance with 42 U.S.C. Sections 1973-1(e) and 1988, Plaintiffs are entitled to
recover reasonable attorney's fees, expenses and costs.
Ix.
PRAYER
89.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs pray that this Court:
(a) assume jurisdiction of this action and request a three-judge panel pursuant to 28
U.S.C. Section 2284;
(b) issue a declaratory judgment finding that Plans Cl 85, H283, and the alterations made
to HD 90 in Plan H358 illegally and unconstitutionally dilute the voting strength of
Latino voters in Texas, violate section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the
14th
and
lS Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and are unlawful, null and void;
(c) permanently enjoin Defendants from calling, holding, supervising or certifying any
elections under Plans C 185, H283, and H358. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at
law other than the judicial relief sought herein, and unless the Defendants are
enjoined from using Plans C185, H283 and H358, individual plaintiffs and
19
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 20 of 21
organizational plaintiff's members will be irreparably harmed by the continued
violation of their statutory and constitutional rights;
(d) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1973a(c), issue an order requiring Texas to preclear its election
changes during the ten-year period following the issuance of such order;
(e) set a reasonable deadline for state authorities to enact or adopt redistricting plans for
congressional and Texas House districts that do not dilute, cancel out or minimize the
voting strength of Latino voters;
(f) if state authorities fail to enact or adopt valid redistricting plans by the Court's
deadline, order new redistricting plans for congressional and Texas House districts
that do not dilute, cancel out or minimize the voting strength of Latino voters;
(g) adjudge all costs against Defendants, including reasonable attorneys fees and costs;
(h) retain jurisdiction to render any and all further orders that this Court may;
(i) grant any and all further relief to which Plaintiffs may show themselves to be entitled.
DATED: September 9, 2013
Respectfully submitted,
MEXICAN AMERiCAN LEGAL DEFENSE
AND EDUCATIONAL FUND
/s/ Nina
Perales
Nina Perales
Texas Bar No. 24005046
Marisa Bono
Texas Bar No. 24052874
Karolina Lyznik
Texas Bar No. 24083431
110 Broadway, Suite 300
San Antonio, TX 78205
(210) 224-5476
FAX (210) 224-5382
20
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 891 Filed 09/09/13 Page 21 of 21
Certificate of Service
The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that she has electronically submitted a true and
correct copy of the above and foregoing via the Court's electronic filing system on the 9th day of
September, 2013. The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that she caused a true and correct
copy of the above and foregoing to be mailed to the persons listed below by the close of the next
business day.
I Lyznik
Karolina J. Lyznik
/s/Karolina
David Escamilla
Travis County Asst. Attorney
P.O. Box 1748
Austin, TX 78767
21